Show newer

I officially survived "The most dangerous dive in the world". Was a great dive, underwater video and pictures coming soon. Attached is the dive profile and an image of the water from the surface.

connect.garmin.com/modern/acti

Another picture of me from today's dive at 190 ft / 60 meters. This time a close up while I'm just floating around vertical taking in the view.

A picture me on today's dive. We are doing the wall dive but a little farther north where its not a vertical slope. This is about 190 feet / 60 meters down.

Its official, tomorrow i am diving the Blue Hole and doing the Archway. It is called "The worlds most dangerous dive" due to the huge number of people that died attempting it. That said, its not really a risky dive for a tech diver. The Archway is about 190 feet/ 60 meters down and provides a tunnel out to the open ocean. I'm going to try to record it.

Hell yea the middle east is about to wage a jihad against my stomach, and i hope it wins!

Went with italian food for tonight. Good view and the italian is surprisingly good for egypt, they even have homemade gnocchi.

What a 50 meter / 170 foot wall dive looks like. Its basically a near vertical wall that descends to the bottom of the sea. Quite the sight. The two pictures are at the top of the wall just before going over and down. Then at the bottom I have one picture of me and my dive buddy swimming along the wall at depth. I included a picture of my dive computers to show the depth.

I will upload the full video tonight.

My view from the restaurant tonight. It inspired me to order lobster.

Im not entirely sure what the covid rule is being depicted here or how it involves a camel... But i reall want to know.

There has been a lot of discussion lately, much of it just plain incorrect, about the relationship between resonance and antenna efficiency. Many incorrectly claim that resonance has nothing to do with antenna efficiency at all, similarly others incorrectly claim that resonance is a direct indication of efficiency. Neither of these statements is true. The reality is that resonance does have a significant impact on how efficient your antenna is, but the relationship is highly non-linear and depends on many characteristics.

Below I have attached a chart hat plots out the total radiation resistance (R_r) vs the measured input resistance (R_in) of a dipole. Efficiency is just R_r/R_in. In other words an efficient antenna will have 100% of its resistance as radiation resistance, and R_in is **always** larger than R_r (since it is essentially ohmic resistance plus radiation resistance). When these two numbers differ significantly an antenna is inefficient. The source for the chart below is here and it gives much of the math if you want a deeper dive:

nptel.ac.in/content/storage2/c

What is important to note here is that at anti-resonance we see a **huge** R_in value and a small R_r value, this means an anti-resonant antenna will have very high losses. Keep in mind the graph is very hard to read for the values <0.5 in length because the resolution isnt high. But there is significant divergence there as well. Notice at ~5/8ths wavelength antenna would exhibit very significant internal ohmic losses due to heat.

@Electronics

180 feet / 55 meter dive complete. Tissue saturation half hour post dive for reference. Had a reverse block on my ears on ascent otherwise it went well.

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.